DirtyHarry
Debutant
I don't know if its me or not, but I can see a pattern emerging in most of our games this season;
Lyon produces a game plan revolving around keeping possession with pinpoint passing by foot and switching around the zone across halfback where possible. The players try to play this, daring not to go through the middle but getting around the group of players invariably zoned in the middle of the ground by the opposition by heading down the wings. On occasions, if our players are manned up properly, we hold the ball and even kick backwards if thats our only loose option. Luke Ball is notorious for this, but it could be the fact that he is following team rules laid down by Lyon.
The opposition zone then gets time to fully set up, and the slow ball movement allows them to pretty much pinpoint where the ball is going to be delivered next. Turnovers occur because eventually we have to kick to a 2/3 on 1 contest or poor kicking to a player who doesn't expect the ball due to our disjointed attack. Our slower footspeed is found out when the opposition streams down forward, putting pressure on our backline and forcing 1 on 1 or even 1 on 2 contest that more often than not result in goals against the Saints.
The funny part happens when we get so far down the gurgler due to this game plan that Lyon must change our sides style to a running game that kicks to forwards directly, even if they are contested. Players all of a sudden know where the ball is coming from, forwards have their leads honored all of a sudden and turnovers don't hurt as much as they don't happen across the centre or even as far down as half back. This was Hawthorn's surprise factor for the cluster; they're in a much better position forcing turnovers in their half of the ground rather than half back/full back.
Back to the story, we generally play much better during this period. This explains our late (but ultimately futile) comebacks in games during the first half of this year. We play with a crap game plan for three quarters, switch it when all seems lost, and come good towards the end.
The funny thing about the game v North was, that I believe we all thought we were gone at quarter time, and so did the coaching staff. Instead of making the switch at three quarter time, we made it at quarter time, and look at the results.
Therefore, my hypothesis is that the game plan Lyon is trying to implement is not working, and a free flowing style that worked for us in the past is definately the way to go. This is backed up by Lyon's recent comments in saying the first quarter debacle against North was his fault.
If anyone thinks I have this completely wrong, feel free to combat this with some logic. I'm not going to be afraid to say I'm completely off the mark, but as the heading says... Isn't it funny!
Lyon produces a game plan revolving around keeping possession with pinpoint passing by foot and switching around the zone across halfback where possible. The players try to play this, daring not to go through the middle but getting around the group of players invariably zoned in the middle of the ground by the opposition by heading down the wings. On occasions, if our players are manned up properly, we hold the ball and even kick backwards if thats our only loose option. Luke Ball is notorious for this, but it could be the fact that he is following team rules laid down by Lyon.
The opposition zone then gets time to fully set up, and the slow ball movement allows them to pretty much pinpoint where the ball is going to be delivered next. Turnovers occur because eventually we have to kick to a 2/3 on 1 contest or poor kicking to a player who doesn't expect the ball due to our disjointed attack. Our slower footspeed is found out when the opposition streams down forward, putting pressure on our backline and forcing 1 on 1 or even 1 on 2 contest that more often than not result in goals against the Saints.
The funny part happens when we get so far down the gurgler due to this game plan that Lyon must change our sides style to a running game that kicks to forwards directly, even if they are contested. Players all of a sudden know where the ball is coming from, forwards have their leads honored all of a sudden and turnovers don't hurt as much as they don't happen across the centre or even as far down as half back. This was Hawthorn's surprise factor for the cluster; they're in a much better position forcing turnovers in their half of the ground rather than half back/full back.
Back to the story, we generally play much better during this period. This explains our late (but ultimately futile) comebacks in games during the first half of this year. We play with a crap game plan for three quarters, switch it when all seems lost, and come good towards the end.
The funny thing about the game v North was, that I believe we all thought we were gone at quarter time, and so did the coaching staff. Instead of making the switch at three quarter time, we made it at quarter time, and look at the results.
Therefore, my hypothesis is that the game plan Lyon is trying to implement is not working, and a free flowing style that worked for us in the past is definately the way to go. This is backed up by Lyon's recent comments in saying the first quarter debacle against North was his fault.
If anyone thinks I have this completely wrong, feel free to combat this with some logic. I'm not going to be afraid to say I'm completely off the mark, but as the heading says... Isn't it funny!
